Gentlemen, thank you for being with us this morning, and thank you for your service. I have many questions, any one of which will gobble up the time very quickly, so I'll try to be as succinct as possible and then look forward to the remainder of the discussion.
I think one thing that both opening statements made reference to is the complexity of the subject matter at hand. I think that's one aspect in which this committee could add tremendous value.
Just to give you a bit of a flavour of my own perspective, I had the privilege of serving in the UN mission in Iraq from 2005 to 2012 at a time when there were still active coalition combat operations going on. The complexity inside the green zone involved the coordination of multiple fragmented government departments within the Iraqi apparatus, dozens of UN agencies that all had very different interests in the reconstruction and development agenda, and dozens of UN member states that had their own interests, political, economic, and otherwise. That exercise alone, of coordinating the complexity of interests, was monumental and explains in some respects the outcome we saw in Iraq.
I wanted to start with Mr. Gwozdecky. Just to add another layer of complexity, you spoke about the values. We're doing this from a Canadian perspective because of national interests, our core values, and our interests in burden-sharing. What I'm concerned about are your views and those of colleagues on the panel on what I see as an emerging fragmentation of values internationally that would even get us to an effective starting point in peacekeeping operations.
You mentioned the challenges the UN is facing, and I'm wondering if you could elaborate on your views on what the current constellation of values is with respect to peacekeeping globally.